Download
valuing e portfolios formative and summative assessment n.
Skip this Video
Loading SlideShow in 5 Seconds..
Valuing E-Portfolios:  Formative and Summative Assessment PowerPoint Presentation
Download Presentation
Valuing E-Portfolios:  Formative and Summative Assessment

Valuing E-Portfolios:  Formative and Summative Assessment

1 Views Download Presentation
Download Presentation

Valuing E-Portfolios:  Formative and Summative Assessment

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

  1. Valuing E-Portfolios:  Formative and Summative Assessment Jane Moore, National-Louis UniversityDavid Wicks, Seattle Pacific University

  2. E-Portfolios have become the norm in teacher education programs.  How can we make them meaningful, integrated and valuable to both students and faculty members? Initial response to a requirement for electronic portfolios can be overwhelming.  Both students and faculty members often need to be convinced of the value of this time-consuming and reflective process.  This session gives a practical framework for developing a successful electronic portfolio practice.

  3. Portfolio Content and Structure - reflections - artifacts

  4. Contact Information • Jane Moore jmoore@nl.edu • David Wicks dwicks@spu.edu

  5. Artifacts, Reflections & Rubrics

  6. Students valuing process • Opportunity to engage in reflective practice • Chance to look at a body of work which reflects effort and understanding throughout the program • Capstone project

  7. Student Training • Part of first core course – both technical and philosophical • Portfolio system is used as course management tool (National) • Online help and tutorial, telephone, email

  8. Faculty valuing process • How is work divided? Portfolio assessment tied to a course or assigned faculty load • Anonymous or known reviewer? • Who can assess? Adjuncts and/or Full-time faculty

  9. Faculty Training • In department meetings • Just in Time • Shadowing • Inter-rater reliability • Guidelines • Power users provide help

  10. Administration • Top down due to accreditation requirements • Issues • Making load time for assessments • Assessment director vs. Assessment council • Taking ownership of rubrics and standards

  11. Big questions • Can we keep it meaningful without it becoming unmanageable? • Have we sacrificed meaning for manageability?